Is Sarah Palin smart enough to be a feminist?

October 31, 2008

I was born with a penis, which some people believe disqualifies me from expressing an opinion on feminism.  Now I’m not trying to define feminism, or to tell feminists how they should think, feel or act, but when I read this I had to say WTF?:

You might have noticed a recent media burp—gassy, though blissfully short—about a handful of faux “feminists” backing the John McCain-Sarah Palin ticket. I won’t name these women out of concern that feeding their misplaced sense of self-importance may risk them bursting into shriveled balloon ribbons of overextended ego.  If you’re addicted to surreal humor you can find such SP supporters (I call them Spalinists) via Google—if you lack an excuse to put off, say, cleaning the garbage pail, and if you can manage it without bladder-challenging fits of hilarity at the cognitive dissonance invoked by juxtaposing words like “feminism” and “Palin.”

But if any actual feminists are concerned about the effect on Women’s Movement institutions and energy of this clutch of “formers” (a former chapter official of a national feminist organization, a former editor of a feminist publication, former Democratic funders, former Hillary supporters, and so forth), let me reassure you. The “trust date” had already long expired on these women, who’d been voted off feminist leadership posts, or fired, or quietly asked to resign. Some are confessed consultants to the campaign whose candidates they now—surprise!—endorse. I never imagined I’d see a “feminist” mercenary. But then I never heard of rats climbing onto a sinking ship, either.

Spalinists traipse around with their candidate, grinning and applauding her, sometimes getting paraded out to take a bow at a rally. They sound off about how she’s the target of sexism. (She is. D’uh. But being a victim of misogyny does not necessarily a feminist make—or we’d never have had Liddy Dole. Or Britney Spears.)

Spalinists claim they support the GOP ticket (while conveniently ignoring McCain) because: A) Palin is secretly brilliant, B) she is a feminist who only differs with the Women’s Movement in opposing abortion; C) us “elitist” Women’s Movement types who supported HRC but disavow SP are “anti-working-class women,” and—here it comes—D) Spalinists want to “teach the Democratic Party not to take women for granted.”

[…]

A) Anyone who hazards arguing that Palin is brilliant is herselfmorethana few watts short of a bulb. Palin is calculating (you betcha’!), or McCain wouldn’t be hemorrhaging from her stab-him-when-he’s-down wounds as she hypes her 2012 campaign before his is formally pronounced dead. But any real intelligence remotely attached to Palin gleams in Tina Fey’s eye.

That’s where I stopped reading.  If I or some other man had written those first three paragraphs, I would expect to see some righteous indignation and allegations of misogyny.  But the part that disturbed me was the allegation that Sarah Palin lacks intelligence.

Even assuming that the allegation was true (it’s not) what the fuck does that have to do with her credentials as a feminist?

Advertisements

Librarians Against Palin?

September 7, 2008

That name just reeks of astroturf.  I’ll believe it when I see it. 

But it does give me an excuse to use this picture of Gov. Palin.

Shhhhhhh!


The Progressive Puritans

September 2, 2008

Liberals are not judgmental about premarital and non-marital consensual sex. We don’t usually care about extramarital sex either unless it involves public officials and then it’s only relevance is what it tells us of their honesty and judgment.

We basically don’t get involved in condemning conduct on the basis of morality, just legality. If the conduct is legal, it’s nobody else’s business,  That’s what it says on page 47, paragraph 3-A of the Liberal Handbook.

Liberals also believe in the right to privacy. Absent some compelling reason, the state should not stick its nose into the personal lives of anyone. Not only that, but we believe that medical and other records should be confidential, and that no one should be able to see someone private records without permission. Page 83, paragraph 16-B of the Liberal Handbook.

Finally, it is an article of faith among liberals that a woman’s body belongs to her and her alone, and that no one else has the right to make decisions about her body except her. That includes sex, contraception, pregnancy, abortion, childbirth and sterilization, as well as marriage and divorce.  Although we do not approve of underage sex, for pragmatic reasons we believe that minors who are sexually active should have information on and access to contraception, protection and/or treatment of STD’s, pregnancy testing, prenatal care, and abortion, without parental notification or consent. That is on page 3, paragraph 1-A of the Liberal handbook, under the heading “A Woman’s Right to Choose.”

Apparently, progressives do not agree with those ideas. As evidenced by the recent behavior of the “progressive blogosphere” regarding Governor Sarah Palin, her infant son and her teenage daughter, morality will now be investigated and controlled by the Progressive Puritans of the Left. I have here the relevant sections of their sexual morality rulebook:

1. Henceforth, all female candidates for public office will be required to submit detailed sexual histories and all relevant medical records, so that their purity and virtue can be assessed. Any woman who gives birth less than nine months after her wedding day will need her OB/Gyn to certify that the child was premature.

2. Any unmarried daughters over the age of 12 of all candidates will be required to submit to an examination to verify that their hymens are intact. Any candidate whose daughter(s) have been deflowered will be disqualified from office.

3. All newlywed brides who are not widows will be required to produce a bloody bed sheet the morning after the wedding. Any woman who is not pure and innocent on the day of her wedding should be denounced by the groom and the wedding annulled.

4. All women who are visibly pregnant must remain from public view until after the child is born. Breastfeeding in public shall be a crime. Any woman who becomes pregnant from consensual sex outside of wedlock will be required to wear a large red “A” on the outside of her clothing for the remainder of her life.

5. Wanton and/or promiscuous women shall be shunned, and may be banished from the community with their heads shaved as a mark of shame. Woman who dress lewdly or provocatively in public may be whipped by the morality police who shall patrol the streets of our communities. Any woman who exposes more than the minimally necessary amount of flesh shall be deemed to be dressed lewdly, and any woman whose clothes fit snugly so as to reveal the shape of her “humps” shall be deemed to be dressed provocatively.

6. Any woman who dishonors her husband, father or family may be summarily executed without trial by the man she has dishonored or an adult male member of her family.  If a married woman is executed by her father or male family member, the husband shall be entitled to compensation or a replacement wife.  Any woman who has engaged in non-consensual sex with a man other than her husband shall be considered dishonored unless she promptly marries the man.

Read the rest of this entry »


Don’t Go There!

August 31, 2008

Oops, too late, you already did.

John Avarosis is living proof that kool-aid causes brain damage.  In this post he claims that the presumptive Republican Vice Presidental nominee, Sarah Palin, conceived her oldest child (Track) out of wedlock.

Dumb move John,  D-U-M-B

Let me tell you why:

Stanley Ann Dunham and Barack Obama Sr. were married on February 2, 1961.  Barack Obama Jr. was born on August 4, 1961.

Do the math.

Sarah Palin married her high school sweetheart (a Russell Crowe look-alike) and is still married to him.  That was in 1988, when she was 24 years old

I seriously doubt that she will lose any votes if it turns out she wasn’t a virgin on her wedding day.


Fair is Fair!

August 30, 2008

If you are a feminist, womanist, or a liberal/progressive who thinks women should cast their votes based solely or primarily on “woman’s issues” then you cannot rightfully criticize any woman who casts her vote in order to help a woman break the glass ceiling and become the first female Vice President.

If you have argued or agreed with the idea that there is nothing wrong with African Americans voting for for an African American candidate over a white candidate, even if the white candidate has a longer record of working to advance the interests of African Americans and advocates policies that are more beneficial to the African American community, then you are a hypocrite if you criticize a woman who votes for another woman based on gender, even if the male candidate advocates policies that a more beneficial to women.

As a white male, I don’t have a dog in this fight.  I have never criticized the overwhelming support given to Barack Obama by the African American community.  I think it is perfectly logical and reasonable for them to support an African American candidate in the hope of seeing him become the first African American President of the United States.  I also understand why so many women supported Hillary Clinton.

My issues with Barack Obama have nothing to do with the color of his skin, and my support of Hillary Clinton has nothing to do with her gender.  But anyone who supported Barack Obama in whole or in part because of his race, cannot criticize anyone who supports Sarah Palin in whole or in part because of her gender.  Fair is fair.

The primary campaign was historic because it saw one of the two major political parties select a Presidential nominee who is African American.  It would have been just as historic if Hillary was selected as the nominee, because she would have been the first woman to reach that milestone.

This election continues to be historic because the “highest, hardest” glass ceiling that has kept women and minorities from either of the two highest offices in the country will be shattered regardless of who wins in November.  If the person who shatters that glass ceiling is Sarah Palin, I will have mixed emotions.

I will be happy and proud to see a woman reach the nation’s second highest office.  I will be sad because that woman is a Republican, and because Democrat Hillary Clinton deserves the honor of shattering that barrier.

If the Democratic leadership had not been infected with CDS, they would have given Hillary the Presidential nomination that she both deserved and rightfully earned, and had he run a clean campaign they could have selected Barack Obama as her running mate. 

Had the Democratic leadership done so, both candidates would have blasted the glass ceiling to smithereens in November, and a more experienced Barack Obama would be perfectly positioned to follow Hillary into the Presidency eight years from now.  That would be sixteen straight years that the Oval Office was not occupied by a white man.

But the Democratic leadership was too full of hatred for the Clintons, and Barack Obama too arrogant and impatient to wait or to allow a woman to go first, so John McCain and the GOP have seized the golden opportunity presented to them.  Until yesterday morning I thought John McCain would more likely than not defeat Barack Obama in November.  Barring any unseen developments, I am now certain of it.

Four years from now, the Democratic party will have a final opportunity to ensure that the first woman President of the United States is a Democrat.  They can nominate Hillary Clinton, and watch her beat either McCain (if he runs for reelection) or Palin (if she is nominated to replace him.) 

She would also beat the stuffing out of any other Republican the GOP could nominate.

So if you supported Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton for the Democratic Presidential nomination, don’t come whining to me about “McSame” or “4 more years of Bush” when McCain and Palin open a big can of “Whoop-Ass” on Obama and Biden this November. 

If you do, this will be my response:

“I TOLD YOU SO!”


McCain to Obama: “You got SERVED!”

August 29, 2008

Meet GOP Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin and her family.  Is that family good-looking or what?

This was a master-stroke by Johnny Mac.  All that misogyny by the He-Man Woman Haters Club known as Obamanation just came back and took a big ol’ bite out of Teh Precious’ skinny butt.

For months the women supporting Hillary Clinton have been told to shut up and fall in line because they had nowhere else to go.  John McCain just sent them this message:

“I WANT YOUR VOTE”

This was a brilliant move by McCain.  Sarah Palin is young and telegenic, and any attack on her lack of experience opens up the GOP counter-punch of attacking Uh-bama’s lack of experience.  When the He-Man Woman Haters Club launches misogynistic attacks on Palin (and they have already begun) it puts the GOP in the position of supporting and defending women.

When McCain retires in 4-8 years, Sarah Palin will be the natural front-runner to replace him, thus extending GOP control of the White House even longer.  Hillary bashed her head bloody on that glass ceiling, leaving 18 million cracks.  Sarah Palin will be the one who finally breaks through.

Thanks for nothing, Howard, Donna and Nancy.  It could have been Hillary Clinton, instead it will be a Republican.

UPDATE:

Democratic party takes careful aim, shoots themselves in both feet by putting out message that Sarah Palin is too rural and too inexperienced.

UPDATE II:

Obamanation appears to have been caught with their pants down on this pick.  It took nearly two hours for their trolls to start making cookie-cutter negative comments about the nomination of Governor Palin.  McCain had them totally faked out with rumors that he was going to select Pawlenty or Romney.  Obamanation had nothing ready on Palin, and their initial shoot-from-the-hip reaction was D-U-M-B:

“Today, John McCain put the former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience a heartbeat away from the presidency. Governor Palin shares John McCain’s commitment to overturning Roe v. Wade, the agenda of Big Oil and continuing George Bush’s failed economic policies — that’s not the change we need, it’s just more of the same,” said Bill Burton, Obama Campaign Spokesman.